Yes, that could be a problem. I actually have a workprint, so I could perfectly work that way and avoid altering/dusting the negative.
Cheers 2017-10-23 4:42 GMT+02:00 Fred Camper <[email protected]>: > > On 10/22/2017 8:46 PM, Jeff Kreines wrote: > > We did “cull” our original (usually reversal, back in the day) before wo > rkprinting, to save every last penny. > > As did big-budget Hollywood films -- that was the difference between the > director ending a take with a call of “cut,“ or “cut print.“ > > Cutting from workprint is a wonderful luxury. You can actually try out > different things, and different shot lengths, without damaging the original. > > I agree about conforming and dust. Dust is a problem with reversal too, > but when cutting negative it is much worse -- a black speck against a > bright field is annoying, but it does remind one of the material nature of > celluloid. A white speck against dark, which happens all too often with > negative, what is that about? A lot more noticeable than a black speck, and > actually a little too revealing of the process, if you ask me... > > Fred Camper > Chicago > > _______________________________________________ > FrameWorks mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > > -- Esperanza Collado - - - - - - - - - - - - - - www.esperanzacollado.org
_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list [email protected] https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
